Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Most Holy Eucharist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Most Holy Eucharist. Show all posts

Sunday, December 12, 2021

We need to replace Bergoglio with Viganò this Christmas...

 Amici,

Jorge Mario Bergoglio's birthday, December 17, (born 1936) is almost upon us, so, here's a reflection. 

As Satan gets himself enthroned at the UN Visitor's Plaza (at the UN, he's more of a resident that a visitor!) and the Democrats try to get us in a war with Russia over the Ukraine...
  • N.B. In February 2014, the Obama administration fomented a coup d'état in the Ukraine and re-started the Cold War. At the moment, it looks like the Deep State is fomenting more trouble in the same area, namely, a war with Russia. Just peachy.
... and as Big Pharma and its bootlickers in North America, Australasia, and Europe refuse Ivermectin to treat Covid (see this great article by Jack Cashill on Robert F. Kennedy Jr's new book The Real Anthony Fauci, and thus needlessly perpetuate this now nearly incoherent Covid drivel, as all this Deep State sludge flows slowly on like molten lava, consuming everything in its path, the only real power in the world that could thwart this dismal Western Civilization death denouement is the Catholic Church. 

Unfortunately for Western Civilization, the Church remains under the heel of that Modernist anti-pope puppet, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, and his merry gay cadre of perverts who join in or encourage the moral and cultural rot, and seem only to show energy in doing their very best to destroy the Traditional Latin Mass. As has been manifestly evident since The Ogre's installment into his current usurped office, the only people the Argentine Destructor doesn't like are faithful conservative Catholics – and especially all the Traditional Catholics. Traditionis Custodes (correctly translated as "Jailers of Tradition") is all the evidence you need of that; but as it is, it's merely icing on the cake of Bergoglian loathing.

Yet we have Archbishop Viganò speaking out clearly, like the Church should, on all this madness, generally called "The Great Reset'. We have Bishop Athanasius Schneider, as well. Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, is an American – one of the few – who is worthy of the ecclesiastical office he holds. And when I say, "one of the few", I mean that most of the bishops would correctly toe the orthodox Catholic line were we to have an orthodox pope; when we don't, as now, they hedge. They're the exact kind of men who sat of the English bench of bishops when Fat 'Arry the Eighth broke with with Rome in 1534.

We didn't need bishops like those then, and we don't need them now. Gutless bishops, wind-sniffers, C.S. Lewis' "Men Without Chests" are the curse of the Church, nearly its bane. As the End closes in, some of them might find their courage. Big deal. That happened with what they called Recusant Bishops back in the 16th century when Queen Mary came to power after the death of her father and her half-brother. But being "recusant" seems historically to translate, basically, "Too damned late to prevent disaster."

The Catholic Church's is bereft of bishops. The Vatican seems to loathe the orthodox ones; consider how it (under JPII, supposedly a conservative) treated the SSPX for ordaining bishops, a necessary step for the Society's survival. Then the pressure was brought to bear on the Society when one of those bishops, Richard Williamson, called into question the standard party line about the Holocaust. Doing that in Germany can get you thrown in jail, and Williamson was convicted in a German court of being a Holocaust denier. (Many Germans seem to relish "Holocaust Guilt" and the Jews will never let them off the hook, but the problem is the Germans run the EU and they make everyone else in that Deep State fraternity feel guilt about the Holocaust, too.) But all this means is the Jews have power to sack a bishop, and few indeed are the bishops who will mention the Jews today at all. The Jews – citing the Church's Holocaust Guilt – has the Church in effect teaching a new gospel; i.e., unlike in the pre-Vat2 days, when the Vatican had a office for this, the Catholic Church today has no evangelical outreach to Jews at all, and if one cannot be saved without Christ, which is the basic Church teaching, all these souls are lost. Or on the other hand, if one can be saved without Christ – something I know many rabbis believe the Church has changed its teaching on – rabbis, imams, Buddhists, you name it – then that's definitely not Christianity has it has been taught for 2,000 years.

And if this is the case, why hold back? Why not ask the learned professors at Cairo's Al-Azhar University to write up Christian doctrine? (Al-Azar is Islam's chief theological authority and the second oldest degree-granting higher education institution in the world – were I to have PhDs in any discipline from both Harvard and Al-Azhar, I could teach anything in the world to anyone anywhere!) Or why not appoint the Dalai Llama, by all accounts a great guy, to be the next pope? I mean, if you're  going to be ecumenical, don't be half-hearted about it! Ecumania!

So, our Catholic reality is, we of the laity and lower clergy, we have to attach ourselves to Viganò and the few like him, before it is too late. Anyone have any personal contact with their bishop? No? I thought not. Dioceses in the U.S. and much of the world are too large for bishops to have ANY contact with their flocks. A necessary Church reform would to treble or quadruple the bishoprics in every nation, and treble or quadruple the archbishops, then make the latter responsible for their suffragan bishops, and move the pope up from Wojtyłan rock-star or Bergoglian fathead heresiarch to be what a pope is supposed to be, Christ's Vicar, His ultimate servant in the Earthly Church, the supreme court and supreme theologian and supreme pontiff, the guy who deals with a profound issue only after it works its way through the Church's hierarchy of authority and thus narrowed down for one man to make his decisions on based upon Holy Writ and Holy Tradition.

Bergoglio has done none of that. Flashing his classic grimace (watching him perform a Novus Ordo Mass has to be depressing!), the man casts opinions off of his cuff whenever he has an itch: on planes, in asides to gay activists, in tête-à-tête comments with Communist reporters, you name it. He inserts himself into whatever he has a notion to: international boundaries and petty politics, the glories of socialism and the evils of capitalism, Global Warming, Covid. "Bergi" even had pagan Pachamama worship in churches in Rome! (And I read where he's encouraging a Pachamama shrine in Argentina now.) And the world bench of prelates "grin and bear it".

Blame John Paul II. Karol Wojtyła made the Bishop of Rome every Catholic's personal bishop, indeed, his personal clergyman. Now we have Bergoglio, everyone's personal heresiarch and headache.

Anyway, on and on the sorry spectacle goes, like Caligula or Nero debasing the job of emperor. On and on. But one is saved through participation the Sacraments, the chief of which is the Most Holy Eucharist, the New Covenant, the New Testament, the Transfigured Paschal Sacrifice, and for that, we need validly ordained priests and bishops who aren't just CEOs or feudal lords or bench warmers, but bishops. Viganò is such a one.

This Christmas season, we need to pray and sacrifice, and be prepared for whatever comes.

An Préachán



Friday, October 11, 2019

Our Lady and the Immaculate Conception Is Central to Our Salvation

Our Lady and her Immaculate Conception is central to our salvation, because just as Our Blessed Lord inherited His humanity -- His Jewish humanity -- through her, and thus could in Himself fulfill all the previous Covenants that God had made with the Patriarchs (the first Covenant being with all Creation, of course, and the second with Adam and Eve, and so on), over time creating, fashioning, the Jewish People in the process, preparing the way for His Incarnation -- so we, through our participation in the Incarnartion via the Most Holy Eucharist (itself the New Testament, New Covenant, not the 27 books of the Christian Bible), receive His Divinized Humanity. Being Incarnated ourselves in the Incarnation now, with our natures changed, is the core of the Faith, and it is something all Protestantism denies -- and denied from the very beginning.
And so our Blessed Mother's Immaculate Conception is the first step in the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, and our own incarnation in Him, we ourselves via the Most Holy Eucharist having Jewish blood in our arteries along with His Divinized Nature, with the Blessed Mother truly being OUR Mother now.
ALL OF THIS the Modernists and their tiresome, quasi-Lutheran, (cretinous, actually), teaching denies. Their understanding of what the Faith is is defective, based as they do base it on Evolution, our evolution in "understanding" and even "God's evolution". This is the unholy seed Protestantism bequeated them when it started, and that has since grown hideous, and it is what they want to foist on the Catholic Church, and what we Trad/Orthodox/Conservative Catholics repudiate.
There can be no "middle ground" with the Modernists.
RC

Wednesday, August 7, 2019

Heaven, Hell, Limbo, General Thoughts

A great essay by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski has been posted at OnePeterFive.  However, just a note: Dr. Kwasniewski didn't mention Limbo. For a review of that, see this old Catholic Encyclopedia article for a discussion of Limbus patrum and Limbus infantium. Regarding the latter, after reviewing it, I was once again struck by the severity of the disagreement between the most eminent theologians in the Church's history.

Being followers of the Lord Christ isn't easy, on many levels, as all here know and have often attested. Even Dr. Kwasniewski has discussed how difficult his life has been -- has been made to have been -- for following the Traditional Faith. And in general, for a Christian, the question of Hell and who goes there is one of the difficulties. We can read Holy Writ that makes it plain those without Our Blessed Lord are Hell-bound, and He Himself plainly says the road to Hell is wide and easy. (Matt 7:13, for example.) But he also tells the Pharisees "not to judge" -- meaning not to judge specific individuals' final destination. (He clearly teaches us to judge immoral behavior and shun those who insist on practicing it: see Matt 18 about the brother who sins.) And what of all those of the human race who never heard of Him at all?

Also, if we stress Hell too much, we turn off people. Now, mind me, I don't mean the modern Vatican II Church's pablum about that; I mean in the old-time preachin' down in the hills, or among the Calvinist Orangemen: the endless focus on Hell produced serious neurosis. I've heard a number of first-hand accounts of individuals who either went mad or certainly got as far away from "religion" as they could because of it. Ironically, a successful revival, like The Great Awakening, too often left what wags called a "Burnt out" or "Burnt over" district. As in most things, I suppose, there's a Golden Mean in preaching Hell. Clearly, though, we've gone far, far, way too far into the "Don't worry, there, there" school of religion as therapy. The Christian Faith is Faith first, the Transformation in Christ, the infusion of Grace; and if there's anything "therapeutic" about that, it comes of Our Lord's boundless Grace.

But perhaps the real problem is that while it is clearly necessary to preach Hell, we can't judge individuals as to whether they go there or not. (So many of us SO want to say that of people we know, but it is as much the sin of presumption as saying a recently deceased went to Heaven!)

Oh, certain cases are plain: Hitler, for example. If Adolph went to the Pearly Gates and St. Pete threw them wide open and said, "Adolph! Come on in!" Hitler would look in and see countless Jews -- Ancient Jews, Jews at the time of Our Lord on Earth, and Jews in plenty thereafter because we non-Jews become descendants of Abraham and members of the Covenant via Baptism and especially the Most Holy Eucharist. Hitler wouldn't enter Heaven because it is full of Jews! Or take a pornographer (various names come to mind): they'd look in through the Pearly Gates and see the most beautiful, attractive people imaginable, beyond their imagination, indeed! But they'd see NO lust! "To Hell with this!" they would say and go look deep past the Gates of Hell. There they'd see infinite ugliness, but lust the likes of which they never dreamed of. Guess where they'd go. In a real way, one can say, each individual chooses Heaven or Hell for themselves, with Our Lord God on Judgment Day reflecting them back to themselves in perfect clarity, such that each of us will know upon that instant whether we really wanted to do God's will in our lives, or thwart it. (In that moment, we'll be like the angels were on their Day of Judgment, knowing what they knew in absolutely perfect clarity.)

[Note that Matt 25, starting at verse 31, would suggest everyone is surprised by their sentence of Bliss or Damnation, the opposite of this idea I mention, or seemingly so. One must remember that the dead are outside of time, in what Boethius called "the Boundless Now", so all moments are eternally "present". No one will celebrate their millionth year in Heaven or lament their millionth year in Hell: time there doesn't exist as we experience it on Earth.]

Finally, there's the question of justice. Justice is giving something its due. Rejection of God is due Hell, as a matter of justice. Without Hell -- which as Dr. K shows the Vat2 Church really isn't "into" ("We're just so NOT into Hell, peeps!" say the hip Vat2 prelates), there's no justice for those who reject Our Lord, and they deserve justice just as much as anyone else; in other words, without Hell, there'd be no justice for those who obeyed Him, either, those who entered into the Covenants He established for our salvation, and who, despite temptations, and by God's bountiful Grace that enabled us to stay in the Covenants, stayed fast. The "there's no Hell/no one in Hell" crowd have simply no answer to this argument.

Ultimately, there's one thing I certainly believe about this matter, one sure and certain thing. All the Damned and all the Saved and all the (I suspect, just an opinion, quite a host) in Limbo, will all aver with the strictest conviction what ol' Abraham Lincoln said in his second inaugural, when he quoted the Psalmist, in the second half of verse 9 of Psalm 19, "...The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

Amen to that!

An Préachán

Monday, August 5, 2019

Recommended Article: "Why Heretics Hate Mary and We Should Love Her More"

Amici,

I'd like to recommend this article at OnePeterFive, "Why Heretics Hate Mary and We Should Love Her More", by Timothy Flanders. 

I wrote the following Comment to it. 


Thank you, THANK YOU, Mr. Flanders for this essay and for highlighting: "But it is even more disturbing when we read how the Rhine group at Vatican II successfully suppressed the document on the Mother of God, relegating it, by a narrow vote, to the final section in (against the protests from Eastern Catholic bishops and others)..." and noting Ratzinger's Marian "weakness". ALL those reformers, the hard core (Schillebeeckx, Rahner, Küng) and the milder revolutionaries (de Lubac, Balthasar and Ratzinger), were together weak on her. And thank you for pointing out that "Gay Blade" James Martin ignores her, as well. (True women bring out true men, after all.)

They were weak on her or ignore her because of pride, among a host of reasons, but perhaps mainly because they just didn't get it: that through the young peasant teen's freely-given Fiat, the Jewish girl Miriam's name became known throughout the Catholic world beyond, resonating down two millennia now; an utterly obscure girl from a stunningly obscure time and impossible-to-be-more obscure place became the most famous woman -- indeed, the most famous purely human being -- since Eve; and more famous than Eve, really -- because Miriam is the New Eve, and through her we have Salvation, Salvation Incarnated, which is then, through the Most Holy Eucharist, Incarnated in us.

That's the Catholic Faith, the Incarnation Incarnated in us. It's the Faith of the Historical Church down through the millennia. Protestants reject it, formally rejecting the Real Presence, legalistically denying it in their founding documents: rejecting God's Incarnation in us (and insisting God's grace is only imputed to us, not infused into us), and naturally the Muslims went them one better 1,000 years before Luther was even hatched by rejecting the Incarnation in itself, in its First Instance.

When we participate in the Most Holy Eucharist, as you-all know here, we partake of the Divine Nature of Christ AND His Human Nature; through this Real Presence, we ourselves now have the elevated Incarnated Nature of Christ in us (no matter how small and yet fragile) as well as His Human Nature, which He inherited from His Mother. We literally ARE the Blessed Mother's children. Through Our Lord, we have her DNA. And as all Jews are Jews because they inherit it from their mothers, so now do we inherit the blessings and participation in the Covenants, all through the New Covenant. For to be The People of God (a Vat II favorite phrase) we need to be literally in and of the Body of Christ, and we have that status and true condition through Mary's Fiat.

This should humble us; it should not make us prideful. Well and truly you write, Mr Flanders, that: "True devotion to Mary keeps us safe from the excesses of pride." Amen to that!
Thanks again!

An P